Thumbhole or Pistol Grip Smallbore Rifle Stock advice please

[conradin]

Can anyone enlighten me about what is the advantage of having a thumb hole vs pistol grip stock? For example, an Anschutz 1914-U4 stock vs a 1918 Aluminum stock. I will upgrade my standard stock but I want to know about the pros and cons. I will mostly want to concentrate on prone. Also I expect to loan out the rifle frequently to juniors, so adjustment is also a key there.

[Pat McCoy]

The pistol grip stock is more adaptable to a variety of shooters. The thumbhole stock can be made to fit you, but will fit best in one position and force your hand/arm into possible unwanted angles for other positions.

[Tim S]

Or, if the rifle is going to ge used by several shooters and you don't have time to individually alter the grip, the thumbhole is likely to fit badly. Some adjustable grips the grip can be positioned for one shooter in a way that forces another shooter's arm and shoulder into the wrong position, so it's tense. It's also possible to maladjust a grip; I've often seen grips tilted in at the back o the shooter's wrist is kinked, and I just think why did they think this was a good idea?

[Gutterz]

If you have someone with the knowledge to give you proper advice on grip set-up, I'd always take a pistol grip as opposed to a thumbhole option. Like Tim says, it's very easy to try something with an adjustable pistol grip that actually makes it harder to shoot.

[Center10]

Advantage of pistol grip is that you can tune for your hand. You can custom fit for trigger reach, wrist angle, grip cant. Made a difference for me over the thumbhole.

Best,
Bob

[Tim S]

Advantage of pistol grip is that you can tune for your hand. You can custom fit for trigger reach, wrist angle, grip cant. Made a difference for me over the thumbhole.

Best,
Bob

But all disadvantages if loaning out the rifle.

[Hemmers]

The proposed ISSF rule changes may well prohibit some/most wooden stocks, which may be a consideration if the rifle is to be used in ISSF events or domestic events which enforce ISSF Equipment Control Regulations.

It's discussed on this thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=52226

50m Rifle Specifications
No part of the butt stock between the butt plate and pistol grip may be more than 130 mm below the centerline of the bore.

Gary Anderson's "helpful" comment goes:

Thanks for contacting me with your question about the proposed 130 mm butt-stock lower limit. This proposal represents another small line in the continuing battle with rifle manufacturers over technological doping. This was introduced because manufacturers keep trying to add extra accessories to the bottom of the butt-stock that can become “chest rests” to facilitate resting the stock on the chest instead of on the shoulder as required by the rules (7.6.1.3 b). Whether the final rule is 130 mm or something close to that, I do not know yet, but there almost certainly will be a limit.

Our Equipment Control experts have checked a lot of butt-stocks in the last few months and have found that 130 mm covers almost everything including many older wood stocked rifles. At the international level wooden stocks have almost completely disappeared. I am at the ISSF Junior World Cup in Suhl, GER and just walked the line to check athletes competing in the 50m 3x20 Women event. Only one of 48 competitors was shooting with a wooden stock.

Initially, this limit will apply in international competitions and may or may not be adopted for national competitions.

Basically "No one uses wood stocks even more, not even the people making World Cup finals with them".

Completely ignoring the global community of juniors, club rifles, domestic shooters, etc using wood stocks. This is going to be one of those rules that is universally ignored outside of Olympics/World Cups, because competition organisers simply aren't going to turn people away if they don't show up with a metal stock.

Of course, juries may decide that since a wooden stock doesn't have a pistol grip per se, the rule only applies to stocks with a distinct pistol grip and does not include the "grip area" of a wooden stock (the intent is undoubtedly to include both metal and wood stocks, but if you're going to define it as "pistol grip", people are going to dispute what constitutes a pistol grip).


If you're not shooting at any of those sorts of events, then that's all irrelevant.

[jhmartin]

Well only one competition can then make the argument.
I got a similar condescending note from Gary

Your input is appreciated, but your concern about the 130 mm rule is probably misplaced. The rifles you identified as examples of rifles that would be prohibited are rifles used in developmental programs and not in ISSF Championship competitions. ISSF Rules have to deal with ISSF Championship situations where manufacturers’ efforts to create “chest rests” in violation of prohibitions against such (technological doping) must either be supported with effective limits or be abandoned in favor of even more performance enhancing equipment. The old wooden stocks are not an issue in ISSF Championships. I walked the line in the recent ISSF Junior World Cup in Suhl, Germany and saw only one wooden stock among 48 competing athletes and that stock passed the 130 mm limit.
The ISSF does not mandate which rules its national federations apply and in fact encourages its member federations to adapt their rules to national and developmental considerations.

One of the issues I see with this argument is that here in the US our international teams are selected FIRST by selection matches using USA Shooting rules (which does indeed modify the ISSF rules). Once the athletes are selected then they are mandated to make sure their gear conforms before they go to an international match. How do you select a non conforming athlete and then tell them they must change out the rifle? Ripping off a seat patch is one thing ... getting your boots to flex more is easy ... changing out your rifle just before (and with USA Shooting it is mostly probably only weeks before) you leave for an international match ... does this sound well thought out for the federation he "represents"?

[conradin]

I guess at this point my original question will be pointless.